Jurisdiction. Restatement of criticism regarding the lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and the legal nature of the contract in the second procedural cycle

DREPTUL CONTENCIOSULUI ADMINISTRATIV ŞI FISCAL

Abstract

As long as the court has not been vested as a result of declining jurisdiction, but as a result of the mandatory provisions of the hierarchical superior court given in appeal, the issue of jurisdiction of the court of first instance, respectively of the Specialized Tribunal, was finally resolved and cannot be called into question without the breach of the authority of res judicata of the decision of the court of appeal in the first procedural cycle. The same arguments are valid, in principle, as regards the legal classification of the contract entered into between parties - the basis of the plaintiff’s claims. In support of the resolution delivered by the court of appeal, to refer the case to the court of competent jurisdiction - the specialized tribunal, the legal nature of the contract entered into between parties was finally determined, it being argued that it falls under the scope of Law no. 31/1990, and not the scope of the labour laws. These considerations which support the resolution ruled on are also covered by the authority of res judicata, according to Article 430 para. (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, and they can be contradicted neither by the court of first instance, nor by the judicial review court. The legal nature of the relationships between parties was finally resolved, as not being the employment relationship, an issue upheld, as such, correctly by the court of first instance, for the rejection of the first three heads of claim.